maa shaa Allah. May Allah reward you for posting it here, and shaykh gibril for translating the epistle. If I knew that there was shaykh gibril's translation, I would have simply copied it here and would not have made my frail attempt. Wa lillahi'l Hamd ala Kulli Haal.
Al-`Izz ibn `Abd al-Salam on the Obligation of Resorting to ta'wil to Refute Innovation Shaykh al-Islam `Izz al-Din `Abd al-`Aziz ibn `Abd al-Salam al-Sulami al-Shafi`i (578-660) gave the following fatwa concerning interpretation of the divine attributes: Q. What is the meaning of the Prophet's saying: "The heart of the believer is between two fingers of the Merciful, He turns it over as He wishes"?3 Does one contravene his obligation if he says: "I do not say anything concerning the verses and the hadiths on the attributes. Rather I hold the same belief concerning them as the Pious Salaf held. To speak about them is an innovation (bid`a), and I let them pass according to their external sense," or is interpretation necessary? A. The meaning of the Prophet's saying, "The heart of the believer is between two fingers of the Merciful" is that Allah exerts His custody of it with His power and determination as He wills, changing it from disbelief to belief and from obedience to disobedience or the reverse. It is like His saying: "Blessed is He in Whose hand is the sovereignty" (67:1) and: "O Prophet! Say unto those captives who are in your hands" (8:70). It is understood that the captives were not left in the physical hands of the Muslims but that they were subdued and conquered by them. The same applies to the expressions: "Specific and non-specific matters are in the hand of so-and-so," and "The slaves and the animals are in the hand of so-and-so." It is understood that all these mean that they are in his control (istila') and disposal and not in his physical hand. Similarly Allah's saying: "Or he agrees to forgo it in whose hand is the marriage tie" (2:237). The marriage tie is not in his physical hand, but the hand is only an expression of his empowerment and his ability to dispose of the matter. For one to say: "I believe in this matter what the Salaf believed" is a lie. How does he believe what he has no idea about, and the meaning of which he does not know? Nor is speaking about the meaning a reprehensible innovation, but rather an obligatory excellent innovation (bid`a hasana wajiba) whenever something dubious appears. The only reason the Salaf kept from such discourse is that in their time no-one construed the words of Allah and those of His Prophet to mean what it is not permissible to construe them to mean. If any such dubiousness had appeared in their time they would have shown it to be a lie and rejected it strenuously. Thus did the Companions and the Salaf refute the Qadariyya when the latter brought out their innovation, although they did not use to address such matters before the Qadariyya appeared on the scene. Nor did they reply to the individuals who mentioned them. Nor did any of the Companions relate any of it from the Prophet since there was no need for it. And Allah knows best."4 3 Muslim (#2654), Ahmad (2:168), Ajurri, Shari`a (p. 316). 4 al-`Izz ibn `Abd al-Salam, Fatawa, ed. `Abd al-Rahman ibn`Abd al-Fattah (Beirut: dar al-ma`rifa,1406/1986) 55-57. SOURCE: http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro8.htm
